"i tried to explain why it's plenty possible to consider Thor comparable to superman in a direct fight, but since you refuse to take any possibility, despite author intent (both Jurgens and Busiek said that it was possible for Thor to win such a rematch after all) or any range based discussion, under consideration and keep going back to specific occasions cristallizing them as if they were "the rule" just because they happened once, and worse misreading most of them as a one dimensional declaration of superiority, well, i can see when logical discourse fails and is no longer viable. No reason to keep arguing when the arguments are so evidently ill recieved and not wanted."

This is straight up hilarious at this point. I take your concession as you've no arguments at this point other than parroting another poster's arguments.

Quote:

"Considering what busiek said in the post you yourself linked to, there is quite a bit of quantifying such things when there is no need to do so. and Peers can certainly block a hit from a peer and knock one out, it happens all the time in boxing matches; if two weightlifters who both can benchpress 400kg tried to push each other back, one of them will eventually lose even if they can lift the same amount. It all comes down to condition when peers fight, not lack of potential strenght or power on the side of the fighter. Otherwise the fight would not be necessary and the winner could be declared before they step into the ring. Not only Busiek, but pretty much most authors if pressed would agree that this is a true aspect to consider in comic fights. there is no quantifying it cleanly, it all depends on so many factors."

I'll wait for a single scan of a peer of Thor to catch Thor's hardest mjolnir strike and knock him out.